One of the surprises of the Senate's repeal of "Don't ask, don't tell," the policy banning gays from serving openly in the military, was the vote of Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina. The reliably conservative Burr was one of eight Republicans who supported repeal.

In a statement after the Dec. 18 vote, Burr made clear his doubts about the timing of the change because "making such a shift in policy at a time when we have troops deployed in active combat areas does not take into consideration the seriousness of the situation on the ground." He nevertheless concluded that "given the generational transition that has taken place in our nation, I feel that this policy is outdated and repeal is inevitable." It was, the statement said, "the right thing to do."

What is not surprising is the reaction of some members of his party in his home state, particularly Mecklenburg County Commissioner Bill James. After commission chair Jennifer Roberts, a Democrat, this week suggested sending a letter from the commission thanking Burr and other local members of Congress for backing repeal, James expressed his disapproval in an e-mail that said, "Homosexuals are sexual predators."

In a column Wednesday, my Politics Daily colleague Matt Lewis asked, "Will 'Gay' Issue Create a Conservative Schism?" -- and the answer may be yes. James said he will no longer support Burr and said he suspects the senator will pay a price for the DADT vote in his next election. (Burr, who was easily re-elected in his November race against Secretary of State Elaine Marshall, won't face voters again until 2016.)

James' Monday e-mail to Roberts (he posted a link on his Facebook page) said in part: "Allowing homosexuals to serve in the US military with the endorsement of the Mecklenburg County Commission ignores a host of serious problems related to maintaining US military readiness and effectiveness, not the least of which is the current Democrat plan to allow homosexuals (male and female) to share showers with those they are attracted to."

Though other county commissioners said that sending a letter on behalf of the entire board was not appropriate, James' language -- especially in the context of his past statements -- has been strongly criticized. (Republicans Karen Bentley and Jim Pendergraph also said they disagreed with the repeal; Democrat Harold Cogdell said commissioners could send personal notes but should not speak on behalf of the board.)

One year ago, when the board voted to approve domestic-partner benefits for county workers and an emotional Commissioner Vilma Leake, a Democrat, mentioned her son and his 1993 death from AIDS, James asked: "Your son was a homo, really?"

GLAAD (the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) has posted a petition urging the commission to censure James. "It's inexcusable to call your colleague's deceased son an anti-gay slur," says a statement on the group's website. "It's even more inexcusable to willfully spread misinformation about the lives of all LGBT people and claim that open military service will do anything but strengthen our national security by allowing all of the best and brightest to serve, regardless of who they are."

Our New Approach to Comments

In an effort to encourage the same level of civil dialogue among Politics Daily’s readers that we expect of our writers – a “civilogue,” to use the term coined by PD’s Jeffrey Weiss – we are requiring commenters to use their AOL or AIM screen names to submit a comment, and we are reading all comments before publishing them. Personal attacks (on writers, other readers, Nancy Pelosi, George W. Bush, or anyone at all) and comments that are not productive additions to the conversation will not be published, period, to make room for a discussion among those with ideas to kick around. Please read our Help and Feedback section for more info.

Add a Comment

Add a Comment*0 / 3000 Character Maximum Comment Moderation Enabled. Your comment will appear after it is cleared by an editor.

12

10 Comments

Filter by:

Juli

What gets me is; *heterosexual* assault (men raping women) is rampant in the military, and the GOP couldn't care less! Why is it when an American soldier rapes female soldiers or even a 12 year old girl, it's just swept under the rug?

What is it with homophobes and showers? My God, do they think that all gay sexual encounters take place in the showers? I think it's just their own sexual fantasies projected onto the debate. Gay military personnel realize that the code of conduct exists everywhere on base - including the showers. Grow up and evolve homophobes. Sheesh. BTW trolls, I'm heterosexual.

But the very vast number of sexual prdators are heterosexual so by Commissioner Bill James' own statement, it would make more sense to ban heterosexuals from serving. His statement is so completely clueless it's funny.

I do not think that most truly understand what the meaning of the law is. Gays have never been denied the opportunity to serve in the military as long as they did not openly disclose their preferences. The law now allows them not only to "come out of the closet" so to speak, but to flaunt it. That is what upsets me.

Oh, by flaunt it you must mean putting up a picture of their significant other or kissing someone of the same gender when they disembark from a long deployment! Or do you mean simply expressing attraction to someone of the same gender? Wait, I'm confused ... what exactly do you mean by coming out of the closet so to speak, and flaunting it? I also am unclear, are you asserting gay individuals could privately disclose their preferences and still be allowed to enlist? If so, I'll need to have you explain the difference between disclosing orientation publicly vs privately. Thanks!

I wonder what Bill James thinks of the gay sex scandals among Evangelical leaders? Also, I would like to know Bill James military background? A righteous Conservative like him served right? A straight vet.

Commissioner James should seek counseling - It is not appropriate for a public official to allow their personal fears and prejudices to direct their public actions. It harms civil society and degrades the honor of a democratic republic.

Woefully ignorant comment. There are percentagewise (given that the gay population may only be 10% or less of the general population) far more predators among heterosexuals than among homosexuals. How about worrying about having heterosexual predators interacting with familes or females on miltary bases or in administrative posts in the military?